Mon, 05 Mar 2018 23:19:09 -0800WeeblySun, 15 Oct 2017 17:25:20 GMThttp://www.verytraumatic.com/blog/should-you-buy-call-of-duty-world-war-ii-pc-beta-gameplay-reviewIn returning to a World War II setting, the Call of Duty series has gone full circle from space-age weaponry. The first game in the Call of Duty series was set in World War 2, but it was also part of a gaming generation where the community was growing weary of all the first person shooters set during World War 2, with competition from Medal of Honor, Battlefield 1942, Red Orchestra, Brothers in Arms, and even a popular Half-Life mod, Day of Defeat.

Now the community is tired of shooters with over-the-top infantry abilities such as wall-running. Also, since there have been no World War II first-person shooters made this decade using modern game engines, it makes sense to return to a World War II setting for an interpretation using modern game engines.

Graphics and Hardware Performance

As a port from the console games, the PC version of the game is the smoothest-running Call of Duty game I’ve played on PC since Black Ops 2. At maximum settings, I am able to consistently get 120 frames per second at 1080p. However, read into this with a grain of salt, as I’m using GTX 1080s in SLI, so I haven’t personally tested the game on other hardware configurations, but from what I’ve read in different forums, most people are able to reliably run the game at reasonable settings relative to their hardware capabilities. What’s even more impressive about the game’s performance is that this is a beta, and there were no drivers that optimized specifically for Call of Duty World War 2. After optimization from both Sledgehammer and Nvidia or AMD for the final release version, the game will most likely run with even better performance across a wide range of hardware.

Although this is the best-looking Call of Duty game to-date, Call of Duty has never been known for pushing the boundaries of graphical fidelity, especially on PC, and the new World War 2 game isn’t going to change that fact. The game does have a lot of polish where it needs it, like environmental texture, character models, and overall object detail, but on its best day, Call of Duty World War 2’s graphics on PC are just hyper-polished renditions of their console counterparts with some added effects, like HBAO. Call of Duty World War 2 won’t have the jaw-dropping realism of Battlefield or Battlefront. The creepy burning death animations are quite gruesome, though. ​

Flamethrowers and incendiary shotgun rounds lead to gruesome immolation

Gameplay Features

Even with a return to a setting without much in the way of advanced weaponry and equipment, Call of Duty World War 2 doesn’t change much about how Call of Duty plays. The game doesn’t stray from its arcade twitch shooter formula. All guns have low recoil with a fast time to kill compared to most other shooters. The major draw to playing Call of Duty over any other first person shooter video game is the sheer volume of what you can accomplish in a relatively short period of time. The weapon unlock, character progression, and challenge system does the best job out of any shooter game in administering short bursts of dopamine so that you constantly feel rewarded.

The Create-A-Class system is more streamlined than most recent Call of Duty games. Certain player perks are tied to the Class Division. The Airborne Division, for example, has perks that aid using the submachine gun weapons. After the Division perks, you can only have 1 selectable perk-per-class.

Besides the remodeling to World War 2 period-specific weapons, the classes of guns have no handling or damage characteristics to the different rifles, submachine guns, and shotguns of other Call of Duty games. Obviously, there were many design decisions to eschew period-authentic attachments and weapon modifications for gameplay variety. ​

Most game modes still have the option for killstreaks, and these are pretty standard fare for what you would expect in a Call of Duty game, such as planes that reveal enemy positions, bombing runs, and artillery strikes. The existence of killstreak rewards lead to more camping strategies in Deathmatch game modes, as you are incentivized to play conservatively when you have multiple kills in one life. ​

We didn’t have access to all the game modes of the full game available in the beta, but we were able to play Team Deathmatch, Domination, and Hardpoint, which are pretty standard fare for most first person shooters. Call of Duty: World War II introduces its take on the new-to-the-series progressive objective offensive game mode in its War Mode. It plays similarly to Battlefield 1’s Operations or Halo: Reach’s Invasion mode. Teams take turns on offense and defense, with attackers needing to complete objectives like capturing control points and building bridges to unlock new sections of the map. Although the mode is fresh to the series and ultimately enjoyable to play, the smaller maps and absence of player-controlled vehicles prevent the mode from having the strategic breadth and intensity of Battlefield and Halo progressive objective modes. ​

We only had a handful of maps available for the beta, but they are all reasonably balanced for objective game modes, with fewer spots for abusing head-glitching and accessible flank routes for teams to avoid getting spawn-trapped around objectives. The major difference in the map design compared to more recent Call of Duty games is the loss of verticality, as the series has not quite taken creative liberties for a Wolfenstein-esque re-imagining of World War 2.

Same (New?) Old, Same Old...

After a written consolidation of details of game features, you can take out the World War 2 visual overhaul and this game is fundamentally a regression from Call of Duty games.

With all that being said, should you consider buying Call of Duty World War 2? ​

If you really enjoy the Call of Duty series multiplayer gameplay formula, and you already buy every Call of Duty release, then there’s no reason why you wouldn’t enjoy Call of Duty World War 2, as it doesn’t stray from the mainstays of its core gameplay mechanics: low recoil guns with fast times to kill on small maps.

If you dislike the Call of Duty formula, then the World War 2 installment doesn’t change enough about the core gameplay to give you reason to enjoy the game. ​

If you generally enjoy Call of Duty’s gameplay, but don’t mind skipping some Call of Duty releases, you aren’t missing anything by skipping Call of Duty World War 2. The multiplayer experience is one of the more forgettable in a modern first person shooter. With fewer class and weapon customization options, the combat has the least variety of modern Call of Duty games, and less longevity because of the limited customization. ​

Players who prefer games that emphasize teamwork should also look for another franchise. Although more organized and communicative teams should win more on average than teams of random players, the inherent variance in Call of Duty gameplay and the “snowballing” advantage of chaining killstreaks means that one person running hot on the opposing team could wreck the cadence of a more organized team. Even in objective game modes, there is potential apathy among team members to play to the objective for a team victory, as you earn rewards for individual accomplishments regardless of team performance. Overall, the teamplay experience of Call of Duty is lackluster compared to games like Rainbow Six or Counter-Strike.

On the other hand, if you prefer playing shooters alone, then Call of Duty is one of the more accessible first-person shooters, for the teamwork relevant gameplay characteristics mentioned above, and also because there will be many free-for-all game modes available at launch. ​

For competitive multiplayer enthusiasts that play on PC, I warn against buying the game at all. Call of Duty games on PC always have low populations, and the playerbase drop-off after the New Year is so severe that I oftentimes have difficulty finding more than 1 lobby per game mode. If you buy the game for its multiplayer, you are relegating yourself to fewer than 2 months of enjoyment.

If you’re a shooter campaign enthusiast, and could care less about the competitive multiplayer, then you should wait for a price drop. The most recent Call of Duty games have had a high production value campaign, and many development videos headline high production value going into the World War 2 campaign as well. I doubt it’s going to revolutionize storytelling in videogames, but the campaign’s story is advertised to feature perspectives on fighting seldom seen in mainstream media.

Nazi Zombies, the wave defense cooperative multiplayer game mode, will make a return for the game’s full release. This mode is a selling point of the game on its own for many Call of Duty enthusiasts. Unless you have friends who are anxious to play with you close to the game’s release, it is logical to wait for the game’s price to drop unless you are also a diehard “day 1” Call of Duty fan. ​

The popular Nazi Zombies game mode returns

There is an argument that it isn’t fair to assess purchase value when the full game isn’t released yet, but let’s be realistic. The beta is released very close to launch, so there aren’t going to be many more features that can be feasibly added before the game ships, and the beta files have been data-mined to reveal only a handful more weapons releasing in the full game.

The Only Thing We Learn from History Is That We Do Not Learn

Call of Duty games never have a shortage of content, but it is seldom different from recycled content with a visual overhaul. Call of Duty’s return to World War 2 continues to disappoint in this regard, but should sell enough copies that Activision won’t push for any drastic changes to the gameplay formula in future releases. The title’s gameplay familiarity and fresh setting will be enough placate most Call of Duty enthusiasts, but will be ultimately passable for other gamers.​

]]>Sun, 01 Oct 2017 04:39:07 GMThttp://www.verytraumatic.com/blog/sightron-s-tac-1-7x24-3-gun-competition-scope-reviewToday's review covers the Sightron S-Tac 1-7x magnification scope's features and performance. Sightron is esteemed in the precision benchrest and hunting community for their premium performance long-range optics, but aren’t as well known for their products designed for tactical shooting applications. I have been shooting with the scope in an American Defense Mount on my IWI Tavor for several thousand rounds from zero to 500 yards, and I am pleased to say that the Sightron S-Tac delivers top-tier performance while remaining an outstanding value for its price point.

The scope comes with lens cap covers, a scope cover, manuals, and a lens cloth.

The scope has a front objective of 24mm, 30mm diameter tube, and is 12.5 inches long. It weighs in at 20.1 ounces without a mount.

One of the most distinct features is the variable magnification range of 1-7x, which is an uncommon magnification range. Most frequently seen are 1-4x magnification scopes, with a diverse price range of optics available at 1-5 and 1-6. Just a few years ago, 1-8x magnification scopes were only available at multi-thousand dollar price range, but they are increasingly common as well, with Primary Arms having an affordable offering.

The field of view is excellent, measuring 91.5 feet at 100 yards and 1 times magnification and 13 feet at 7x magnification.

Sightron S-Tac 1x Magnification

Sightron S-Tac 7x Magnification

Reticle Information

The reticle is the Mil-Hash reticle, using milliradian subtensions to range targets and determine hold overs. The center dot measure .5 mils at 100 yards, which covers a circle with a diameter of about 1.7 inches. This dot size is a reasonable balance between speed and precision. Details about the reticle are available on the product webpage, and the scope has an option for an MOA reticle if you prefer subtensions and adjustments in MOA over milliradians. The reticle is second focal plane, which means that the reticle is a fixed size relative to zoom. If you zeroed your rifle at 7 times magnification, this means that without doing quick math in ratios with 7, the reticle subtensions are only valid at 7 magnification. In contrast, a front-focal plane reticle would adjust in size relative to your zoom level, and the subtensions are valid at any magnification level. These optics are more complex internally, so they are often heavier and are priced according. Sightron doesn’t have a low-power variable magnification optic with a FFP reticle, but there are other companies that do.

The reticle is illuminated, but only in the center dot. There are 11 brightness settings, but the first half are pointless, as you’ll need near pitch black to see the illumination, and if it’s that dark, then you won’t see the target. The brightest setting washes out and isn’t visible during the brightest part of the day, but in those lightning conditions, the reticle already has enough contrast against the target. The illumination runs off a single CR2032 battery. The battery cover is awkward to remove without tools, as it’s difficult to grip the ridges of the cap with your fingers.

Additional Features

The turrets are uncapped, so you can quickly dial for different ranges and wind conditions, and they adjust in .1 miliradians per click, with 29.1 total Mils of adjustment for windage and elevation. The MOA reticle scope would have turrets that adjust in MOA. With just an Allen key, you can loosen and reset the caps to zero the scope. The adjustment clicks have a crisp tactile click, and are resistant to adjusting through accidental bumps. Adjustments are repeatable with extreme precision, a feature from which Sightron is proud to have built a reputation in the long range benchrest community.

The eye relief, which is how far your eye can be to resolve the correct sight picture, ranges from an impressive 4.8 inches at 1x and 3.9 inches at maximum zoom.​The scope has fixed parallax at 100 yards. At longer ranges, this isn’t a problem, as you’ll need consistent eye placement to resolve the reticle, with such a small exit pupil and eyebox at 7 times magnification.

There is a wide range of diopter adjustment to account for different visual acuity in natural eyesight.

The most impressive feature of this scope is the quality of its glass. The lenses are have a full multi-coat layer with Sightron’s Zact-7 Revcoat. The coating maintains the clarity of the precision ground class, minimizes glare, enhances contrast, and optimizes light transmission. Another reviewer, through independent testing using a collimator, found Sightron glass to have clarity on par with a Swarovski Z6i, a scope easily twice as expensive. The collimator helps quantify relevant glass characteristics, so you have peace that the Sightron S-Tac has premium glass. ​

The 1x magnification is the closest to a true 1x magnification as I’ve ever used. Many manufacturers advertise their scopes as 1x magnification at the lowest power, but can produce a minimum of 1.1 or 1.2, like on this Hi-Lux CMR4 1-4. When you can only go as low as 1.1 or 1.2, it is noticeable and can be disorienting to aim quickly with both eyes open shooting at less than 25 yards. Using the Sightron S-Tac 1-7, you can read the label of the protein powder tub from 1 foot away. You’ll never actually need to do this, but it’s a benchmark of the optic’s glass fidelity. You can’t do this with a budget Vortex or Primary Arms scope. You can see some refraction, but that is because of the extreme close range. At greater than 10 feet, the view through the optic seamlessly blends with the backdrop for true 1x magnification.

Best Uses for the Scope

The optic is best used on a semi-automatic precision rifle that serves in the designated marksman role. The 1-7x magnification range gives you fast target acquisition shooting at 1 times magnification and long range precision at 7x magnification. The long eye relief, true 1x magnification, and generous eyebox allow for target acquisition almost as quickly as if you were using a red dot, and the 7x magnification allows you to get shots on target at 800 yards, if your rifle is accurate enough to hit at that range. For law enforcement or military applications, this flexibility allows you a patrol weapon that can go from room clearing to counter-sniping with just a turn of a dial. For the rest of us, the scope is useful for 3 gun competition shooting, as many courses have targets from zero to 500 yards. Whether you need all the power of 7 times magnification is only a decision you can make. The type of target you are shooting at and your biological eyesight acuity are factors that weigh into your decision.

Why would you want a 1-7x scope over a 1-4x, 1-6x, or 1-8x? For the targets that I shoot at with my rifles, there isn’t much practical difference between 1-6, 1-7, and 1-8x times magnification. I do appreciate the extra magnification over the limits of a 1-4 when shooting at small popper targets at longer ranges. If you shoot primarily at silhouette or torso targets, a 1-4x optic is fine out to 500 yards. If you have a rifle with more reach, like an 18 inch barrel 5.56 SPR or a 7.62 Nato rifle, then the extra magnification can help with hits out to the longer effective ranges.

Magnification range shouldn’t be the only factor in your scope choice. All the additional features mentioned above should weigh into your decision.

Features Needing Improvement

In addition to any I have mentioned above, there are only a handful criticisms I have about the scope’s features and quality.

In artificial lighting, the glass has a very light red tint, even with the illumination turned off. I imagine this as a side-effect of the illuminator.

The front objective is deeply recessed relative to the front of the tube. I imagine this serves the role of having an integrated sunshade. The scope could be shorter by ¾ of inch.

I wish that Sightron had included higher-quality lens cap covers with the scope.​Finally, the sight picture loses some of its brightness in low-light shooting conditions. The drop-off in brightness in not nearly as severe as in the Primary Arms 1-6x optic I’ve used previously, but it is there. Fortunately, the illumination is visible in these conditions. This is one of the drawbacks of having a small front objective and a high zoom.

Don’t be discouraged because the Sightron brand isn’t ubiquitous by any means in the United States. Their optics are popular among European competitors, being part of countless trophy-winning rifle platforms.​The optic is made in the Philippines, but is produced using high manufacturing standards and quality control. Sightron offers a lifetime warranty on their scopes.The scope has an MSRP over $1000 dollars, but can be found on Amazon for much less. The value is amazing, as you are getting comparable performance to much pricier scopes.

In summary, the best features of the Sightron S-Tac are its glass clarity, the 1-7x magnification, true 1x magnification view, construction quality, and value for its price. The features on my priority list for improvement are having a shorter front tube, a brighter image in low sunlight settings, and brighter illumination or illumination that extends to the entire reticle.​I recommend this optic to shooting enthusiasts looking for an optic that’s practical for both close and long ranges, need more magnification than the more common 1-4 power optics, and want a better shooting experience than the budget tier low-power variable zoom scopes.

]]>Tue, 01 Aug 2017 07:16:35 GMThttp://www.verytraumatic.com/blog/trijicon-mro-review-the-last-red-dot-optic-you-will-ever-buyThe first few clips in this video were of me doing some 3 gun practice using guns with Trijicon optics, one being the Trijicon RMR, which I’ve already reviewed as part of my Glock 34 MOS, and the other, the review topic of this video, is the Trijicon MRO mounted on my rifle. I have had this optic on my rifle for several months now, have shot many events with it, and, in comparison to the EOTechs and Aimpoints that I’ve owned in the past, can say that the MRO has surpassed many of my performance expectations of a premier electronic optic.​One quick note before diving into the review in-depth: I am reviewing the first generation Trijicon MRO. There is another model, the MRO Patrol, new for 2017, with some additional features that may or may not be relevant for prospective sight buyers. For now, let’s take a look at the technical specifications of the first generation Trijicon MRO.

Technical Specifications Overview

The Trijicon MRO is designed and manufactured domestically. The housing is 7075 T-6 aluminum. Trijicon is known mostly for their Tritium and Fiber optic sights, such as the Trijicon RMR, which require no batteries, but the MRO is powered by a CR 2032 battery. When turned on 24/7/365, it has a battery life of 5 years at the middle brightness setting, which is comparable to the most commonly referenced competing electronic optic, the Aimpoint T2. There are 8 total clicks of brightness adjustment, with the first 2 setting being night vision optic compatible. One subtle but appreciated feature is how the adjustment knob is on top of the optic so it’s easy to adjust with either hand, which is relevant if you shoot ambidextrously. Some other reviewers have argued that the top protrusion of the illumination dial is unreasonably obstructive to your field of view, but the alternative is lateral placement of the dial, and I personally feel having less-obstructed horizontal peripheral vision is more important.

The complete rifle with a Griffin Armament M4SDK Suppressor

​​The 2 MOA dot is visible in any daylight environment, but no CR2032 powered optic is going to be as bright as an EOTEch’s hologram reticle. The emitter is located at 10 o’clock in the tube. The windage and elevation knobs sit flush with the housing, and have total of 70 MOA total travel. Each click represents ½ MOA at 100 yards. The dials are easily adjustable with a coin, screwdriver, or the extractor groove of a round. I do wish, though, that dials gave more tactile feedback for each adjustment click.

​The sight weighs 4.1 ounces with the battery, but without the optic. With the OEM lower-third co-witness mount, the sight will weigh about 5.9 ounces. Higher speed and lower drag aftermarket mounts can bring the weight down slightly. The Aimpoint Micro T-2, on the other hand, is advertised to weight 3.3 ounces without the mount and 4.6 ounces with the mount. Where the Trijicon MRO really stands out from the rest of the compact rifle optic class is the front objective lens, being 25mm in diameter compared to the Aimpoint T-2’s front objective at 20mm. The wide objective lens helps reduce the “looking down a pipe tunnel vision” effect of most other red-dot sights.

The sight picture in bright daylight; you can also see the emitter at the 10 o'clock position in the tube

Idiosyncrasies

The optic does have idiosyncrasies, but most are not relevant to overall performance.

The front lens is installed at an angle, but this is because the nature of red-dot reflector sight technology requires a curved or angled objective to properly project the reticle. It is more noticeable on the MRO than other red-dot sights because of the large objective lens, but it is indeed a feature, not a bug. EOTech uses lasers to project a 3-D hologram, so they are not confined to the same objective glass constraints, and have a viewing window akin to a heads-up display.

All reflex-style optics require some amount of glass tint to display the reticle to its optimum clarity. The view down the optic does give off blue tint, but it is most noticeable when looking at white backgrounds or under artificial lighting. In other environments, and especially through daylight, any tint is all but imperceptible. When looking through optic at extreme angles, though, the tint is more pronounced, and speaking of extreme angles…

The next discussion is about parallax. Yes, the Trijicion MRO will have parallax errors when looking through the sight at extreme angles. But saying as much is pointless, as ALL electronic optics, including EOTechs and premier riflescopes will have parallax errors if you look through the optic at extreme viewing angles relative to how the sight was zeroed. In any case, you should be trying to have a consistent cheek-weld when shooting, and the practical effective range of the MRO makes slight parallax errors mostly irrelevant. We’ll table this discussion for Philosophy of Use. Thanks again, Nutnfancy for the term, but I and many viewers have noticed there has been less discussion about POU in more recent videos, possibly by content creator design to minimize video verbosity.​ Finally, the last major idiosyncrasy abou the MRO is that the optic is not a true zero magnification. I couldn’t perceive any fish-eye effect or lens edge distortion, but It will feel like a 1.05-times magnification when looking through the optic. This is more pronounced at closer ranges. Again, this is a design challenge to minimize distortion and view refraction when working with the reflector-sight design, and Trijicon’s larger objective does amplify these nuances. This is another hardly-noticeable facet but it is still worth mentioning.

The Trijicon MRO in the factory lower-third co-witness mount and a Burris AR-Tripler 3x Magnifier

Philosophy of Use (thanks Nutnfancy...)​I have my MRO mounted on a rifle I built based on the aesthetic of the M4A1 SOPMOD Block II. From the Daniel Defense RIS II rail, Colt M4 receivers, and Colt 14.5” M4A1 barrel, almost all of the the rifle’s components are used in theater, ie, seen “in the wild”, with obvious exceptions being the muzzle brake, which is used used to mount my Griffin Armament Suppressor, and the fire control group, being semi-automatic only. The trigger I have installed in my rifle is the Hiperfire Hipertouch 24C, and I am still impressed with the light pull weight and quick reset. I do have a Geissele trigger ready to install, to make the rifle more authentic to those used in theater, but I’m still waiting for the next recipient of this Hiperfire. It seems ironic to mount one of the lightest rifle optics onto such a heavy rifle setup, but I am still working my way up to my dream optic for this rifle, which is the Trijicon ACOG. Besides, premier optics are a stable investment. They hold their value well, and can last a virtual lifetime of shooting for the average enthusiast. There are many potential rifles that I can use the MRO on once I have my final optic for this rifle.

As a compact red-dot optic, the reduction in weight over an optic such as an Aimpoint PRO or EOTech is a major selling point. Although it may only be slightly 5-6 ounces lighter than a full-size optic, the difference is noticeable, due the optic placement near the rifle’s center of gravity, and you don’t have to be building a race gun to appreciate the reduction in weight and the associated improved rifle handling.

With unlimited eye-relief and low parallax error, a red dot optic excels in close-quarters shooting environments, from zero to 200 yards. Because you won’t have the precision of a scope, the MRO isn’t the best tool if you want tight groups on paper. Rather, you should expect to be shooting at torso-sized targets or silhouettes at longer ranges when using the MRO, so that any parallax error is marginal. You can extend the effective range of the MRO by adding a magnifier. Although Aimpoint and EOTech make some of the higher-end magnifiers on the market, you don’t need a premier magnifier to get the benefit of increased zoom. This magnifier is the Burris AR-Tripler. The dot is still very clear, and because of the tight eye box, the consistent eye position needed to resolve the sight picture helps in minimizing parallax at longer ranges. But be aware that it is possible that you won’t see a super crisp dot if you have astigmatism. There may be a halo effect or a blurry dot depending on your personal vision limitations.

Trijicon has military contracts for their products, so you have complete peace of mind in trusting a Trijicon product on your home defense rifle. With such a long battery life, you don’t have any dials to fidget with to turn on your optic once you take your rifle out of your safe.

​Competition shooters will also consider the Trijicon MRO for their rifle optic, as they are always trying to reduce their equipment weight to help turn in faster course times.

An inevitable question many viewers always ask is “Is there a reason to buy a premier optic over a budget alternative such as a Primary Arms or a Bushnell?’

The answer depends on your goals for what you want your rifle to do, and what you want to get out of your shooting experience, ie, philosophy of use.

The short answer is that if you are watching my video, chances are you're not a military contractor or a police officer looking for their next rifle optic, and you don’t need a premier red dot optic.

For most enthusiasts, the budget red dot sights will work reliably enough for a range toy or competition rifle. It is up to you to decide whether the additional features such as the large objective window is worth the multi-hundred dollar price difference.

However, for the diehard enthusiasts, the Trijicon MRO provides the “next level” of peace of mind in durability and performance. And, as mentioned previously, premier optics maintain their value well, provided you don’t abuse them and mar the glass.​As a modern tactical gear enthusiast, I enjoy using higher-end gear. That’s as simple of a motivation as anyone needs to chase, as Nutnfancy would call it, the “second kind of cool”.

Business-end...

Performance

The MRO is constructed with the same quality standards as Trijicon’s military contract products, which means you can count on a lifetime’s worth of durability. Since the day that I took the optic out for its initial zeroing session, I have had no problems with it.

Aftermarket support and relative value

There is no shortage of aftermarket mounts that you can buy for the MRO, many of which are much higher speed and lower drag than the OEM mount. There are also housing covers and kill flashes available. The Trijicon MRO is available for purchase for almost $200 less than the Aimpoint T2, which is arguably the most comparable product in performance for its size and weight class.

Quick-release mount

Flat dark earth housing cover

Conclusion

If you are in the market for a premier optic, the Trijicon MRO gets my highest recommendation, due to its light weight, large objective window, long term reliability, and high relative value. The only problem that I can see anyone having with the Trijicon MRO, is that you will like it so much, it puts you off of buying any other red dot optic.​This is the last red dot optic you will ever want and need.

Click the picture to buy the Trijiocn MRO as shown in this review

]]>Thu, 05 May 2016 02:13:39 GMThttp://www.verytraumatic.com/blog/the-division-gameplay-review-tom-clancys-airsoft-simulator-2016The Division is Ubisoft’s most ambitious project to date, and it has certainly paid off for them in a big way, becoming their best-selling game and one the best selling IPs after only 1 week of sales. However, for Ubisoft Massive, the development studio based in Sweden, it is their first online-only multiplayer-driven shooter game, and the first time they have had to interact with a dedicated community as large as the Division’s, and the growing pains are obvious, as you’ll see later in the technical discussion section of the review.

For this gaming generation, the holy grail of game design is the Massively Multiplayer Online Open World Cooperative-Competitive Multiplayer Role Playing Shooter- MMOOWCCMRPS?- because consoles and PCs finally have the hardware to make such a project feasible. Whoever designs the best MMOWCCMRPS will have the next Half-Life, GTA 3, or COD 4. Basically, it’s what would happen if DESTINY didn’t suck. The concept is a literal money pile. “Let’s make a game by combining Diablo, DayZ, Borderlands, Destiny, and GTA Online, but make it set in “The Last of Us” disaster-like New York City with modern weapons.” Thus, The Division was born.

At its heart, the Division is a third-person cover based shooter. Your characters do have some degree of ability and perk selection, but the roleplaying aspect of character building is a farce, as everyone will have access to the same abilities and perks by the end game, and switching between different classes of character build just take a few clicks within the menu. Distinctions between characters is largely determined by your gear. The traits that matter are:

1. Firearms, the damage you do with weapons 2. Stamina, your health3. Electronics, the effectiveness (e.g. duration, magnitude, and range) of active abilities

All of these traits are easily modified by changing your equipped gear, so success in the game is almost entirely based on your items’ quality. Hence, the moniker “loot-driven” is often used to describe The Division’s gameplay, likening the end-game goals to that of Diablo, Borderlands, and Destiny. Using the Tom Clancy license, much of the gear is based on real world firearms and accessories, many of which you can have shipped to your door, or just walk down the street to your gun shop and buy it over the counter to take home with you in fewer than 10 minutes, usually. Unless you actually live in New York, of course.

You play as an agent of the actual the Division of the game The Division, of which the Division of the game The Division has an a full name of the Strategic Homeland Division… OK, I’m probably losing viewers by now, but I promise you the actual game will frustrate you more than any of my incoherence. So anyway, the Strategic Homeland Division is a secret division (I promise I’m not trying to use “division” as many times as possible just to frustrate you) of the government. Their primary goal is to ensure the continuity of government and prevent societal collapse through tactical but clandestine methods, which for the game’s purposes just turns out to be shoot everything on sight. The “sleeper” agents selected for The Division come from SWAT, Special Forces, or Counter-Terrorism backgrounds, but they have day jobs and only work for The Division when activated during times of crisis. So when New York City suffers a bioterror attack and a smallpox epidemic ravages the population, it’s your time to shine. The city is put under martial law but even the soldier still loyal to the government can’t prevent the uprising of gangs not unlike those found in the Mad Max universe. The main enemies terrorizing the civilians are looters, escaped convicts, and some sanitation workers who are fiercely dedicated to their jobs. And supposedly, the game has a story where your resistance group [insert generic action movie plot point] and [insert generic TV show plot line] to fight the mercenary group that’s trying to take over the government and there’s the requisite mole/traitor in the Division, because this wouldn’t be a generic political/action story without some corruption, now, would it? And oh, your primary supervisor is a super-needy Asian woman who I’m sure would be the stereotypical high-expectations helicopter Asian parent.

From the minimal effort I gave trying to explain the plot, you should have a sense of the lack of substance in the Division’s narrative. The characters are uninteresting and follow all their expected cliches. The dialogue is cheesy and melodramatic, and your character speaks as often as Gordon Freeman. The plotline is predictable and underdeveloped. And the concept of the actual Division in the Division is mildly preposterous. Why put forth the funding for Division agents who only work in times of crises instead of putting the funding toward actual counterrorism and security assets? Yes, my tax dollars are being put to excellent use! But, for the sake of role-playing and attempt to fit your character into the Division's universe in a meaningful way, I will suspend my disbelief...

Although the narrative is weak, the game’s universe and atmosphere is anything but. The Division’s open world is hauntingly beautiful. Amidst the scenes of devastation, there is an artistic elegance to the world design. Post-disaster New York is convincingly portrayed through the detailed environments. Corpses pile up in contaminated areas. Debris, trash, destroyed furniture pile up in the streets, as basic services end. Personal residences are barricaded but still have holiday lights hanging. Retail stores are ransacked with products strewn all over the place. Haphazardly stopped and hastily abandoned vehicles litter the streets. Memorials and missing persons boards adorn the base and safe houses. The game’s graphical quality has set the new benchmark for open world games. Like Crysis, the game’s visuals were designed to stand the test of time and not seem aged even with later hardware generations. Despite the ambition in graphical intensity, the game is still reasonably optimized for consistent performance scaling across different tiers of hardware. On my i74930k, GTX 980 2 way SLI rig, I can get between 45-90 frames per second, averaging around 60, running all settings on maximum except for antialisiang and reflection quality on low. However, I do detect a lot of frame time variance, meaning that even though the FPS counter could be reading 70, the FPS may feel more like 45. This is a possibility with SLI configurations, which many modern games have found a workaround, but it is still relatively early after its release, so hopefully UBISOFT or Nvidia can make hardware optimizations.

Even on consoles, the game is noteworthy for graphical achievements. In our apartment, we have a PS4 in the community lounge, and someone is always playing the Division in the evenings, and when I sit in to watch, I consider it nothing short of wizardry that the Division can look THAT good on essentially hardware 5 years behind modern PCs. The biggest problem on the console version though is the frame tanking during intense firefights, often feeling like the game’s running at 15 FPS. Even so, the game remains relatively playable at lower frame rates because of the methodical nature of tactical cover shooters.

It’s inevitable that a game of The Division’s scale would use repeating visual elements and assets but the orientation and context of their utilization is diverse enough that I never get tired of just exploring, wandering around with no particular set destination. Even if I’ve passed an intersection 100 times, I can always seem to find some detail that I missed before.

Adding to the game’s realism is a dynamic weather and day night cycle, granting even more diversity to the possible scenes.

The game’s destruction is limited, but it’s still satisfying to see crisp-looking bullet holes through car windshields, and shooting out car tires is therapeautic.

One minor complaint I have is that the civilian NPCs interactions when they complain about how bad things are seem forced, as opposed to the natural-seeming lives of NPCs in the Grand Theft Auto series. In Grand Theft Auto 5, you could follow around an NPC for many in-game hours and they’d go about their business as usual. In the Division, it’s as though the NPCs are like extras in a movie. The bottom line is that The Division’s graphics and world atmosphere are immersive enough to carry the game, and even action game fans without a vested interest in cover-based shooters should try the game just to experience the atmosphere.

Will you actually enjoy playing the game, though?The game’s shooting and maneuvering mechanics aren’t going to come close the responsiveness of twitch FPS games like Call of Duty of Counter-Strike, but it is enjoyable enough to keep you on your toes during long grinding sessions. The cover-to-cover mechanic is mostly reliable. I do like how much recoil the automatic weapons have, and how much the recoil increases the longer you hold down fire, making trigger discipline vital in gunfights across cover. The game dips its toes into science-fiction to give your characters some gadgetry like seeker mines or a turret. Obviously, you have to most past the immersion-breaking element that makes the gear-stats meaningful at any rate with enemies shrugging off 6 headshots with a 7.62mm bullet traveling at 2600 feet per second with 2500 ft-lbs of force. Outside of the game’s main missions, there are side missions for you that help increase your base’s operational capacity, and it’s through leveling the dedicated medical, security, and tech wings of the Division's base that your character gains access to more abilities and skills.

The actual missions themselves are rather straightforward, which are a combination of search and destroy, king of the hill, and package delivery. The maps on which the missions take place are open enough to allow diverse approaches in most situations, allowing the player to choose long or short range weapons and complementary skills. They are playable solo or with a group. The enemies you’ll face have the same class distribution amongst the different factions. You have rushers, snipers, tech specialists, and heavies. The AI has the creativity of a McDonald’s Happy Meal Tamagatchi (90’s kids will get this reference!), so fighting the same enemy classes gets repetitive quickly. On harder difficulties, there’s no additional level of complexity. There’s just a multiplier that makes enemies take even more rounds to kill and deal more damage to players. The enemies spawn in the same areas, so just pure memorization can allow you to spawn-camp them. The PVE is definitely not going to be one of the selling points of The Division, as the missions fade into the background as a chore to grind for end-game credits.

The “real” game truly begins when you beat the main story and reach level 30. The story and side missions are only the tip of the figurative iceberg, and shouldn’t take you longer than 20 hours solo, and if you play with a team, you can actually speed run through in as little as 12 hours. The draw of The Division is optimizing your character’s end-game stats for the Dark Zone, the dedicated PVP area. The Dark Zone is where the infection hit New York the hardest, and the military built a wall around it to quarantine the zone. The Zone’s interior is the most dilapidated of all the game areas, and it’s chilling to come across literally hundreds of body bags in a heavily contaminated area….because you never know what other surprises await you. The Dark Zone is a source for high-quality equipment. Your character has a Dark Zone level and credits that you can only spend in the Dark Zone. You can visit the Dark Zone in earlier levels, and it’s actually recommended to level up your character’s Dark Zone level before you reach PVE level 30, because you’ll only face other level 30 agents once you reach PVE level 30. The PVP works much like Runescape’s wilderness. You’ll be marked as rogue if you try to kill other agents, and you’ll lose more Dark Zone credits and Dark Zone experience if you die while marked as a rogue. But, if you survive the Rogue countdown timer, you’re rewarded with more experience and credits than you would get through normal leveling, and you get the keep any gear that you stole from the other agents that you killed. Whether it’s worth the risk to go rogue is up to you. There are DayZ like encounters, when you can find random agents and team up with them, or come across agents that shoot on sight.Most of the gear you find in the Dark Zone is contaminated, meaning it’s worthless until a helicopter extracts it. Watch your back at the extraction sites...those are the most common places for last-second betrayals. The 90 seconds it takes for the helicopter to arrive once you call it are the longest 90 seconds you’ll ever spend in a video game...because you never know if an agent will go rogue to steal all your hard-earned gear.

The cooperative multiplayer is easily the best component of the Division. Even if you don’t know anyone who plays the division, you can go into Matchmaking. Matchmaking is efficient and seamless. You can matchmake for free-roam or specific missions. You have a much better chance of surviving the Dark Zone with a group.

The first free content update launched earlier this month. The Falcon Lost Incursion, which is just a horde-mode wave defense mission, doesn’t remotely resemble a what other MMORPGs would consider a raid, but in doing my research for this review, never did Ubisoft specifically say that the free content updates would be raids. The Incursion is difficult, even for those with high-end gear, and requires much strategy and teamwork to complete. If you beat the incursion, you are guaranteed one armor piece of one of 4 new armor sets, arguably amongst the most powerful available in the game.. Equipping multiple pieces of each set will give you additional bonuses, and they are a good incentive for players to engage in the hardcore end-game grind. What’s bothersome is that legendary, 1-of-a-kind items should already exist in the game at launch. What MMOs don’t already come with several sets of legendary items available at launch? In addition to the armor sets and the Falcon Lost mission, the first content update added supply drops to the Dark Zone, which are a guaranteed source of Phoenix (aka premium end-game money) Credits but also have the possibility of dropping another armor set piece. I do feel that the quality of items that aren’t the armor set pieces could be of higher quality, though, to reward the player for fighting through the mobs, mob boss, and other players that may be trying to steal the supply drop. Otherwise, I feel that the Supply Drops are a quality addition, breaking up the monotony and increasing floor movement in the Dark Zone. The total amount of content for the first free Division game update is mediocre, but you can’t complain about free.

The Division could have been the game that defined this generation. Unfortunately, there are problems out the wazoo. As mentioned previously, skill and weapon stats are unbalanced to the extent that there is convergent character building toward a select handful of weapons and abilities, making the RPG element a farce. One of the big draws of CoD is that there are many viable class setups to fit your preferred playstyle. In the Division, not so much. Gear value offsets player skill to where even 5 points of gear score advantage can make a player virtually unkillable to those with lower gear score. Some abilities are overpowered to the extent that not having an item with them will put you at a disadvantage against other rogues, which leads to trying to craft the same item over and over until you get the exact attribute that you want with a quality level that is determined solely by the RNG, random number generator, leading to an inherently broken methodology of obtaining premium gear. If you’re a high enough level, the Dark Zone enemies drop junk relative to your level. Even the Dark Zone credits and experience earned from mobs don’t scale logically. It would make sense to give double the experience and credits for mobs that are twice as hard to kill, but you only get 2-3% more credits and experience, if that. You can farm Dark Zone enemies for hours and not find one item or earn enough Dark Zone credits to buy an item that is better than what you already have. So, what’s your next logical course of action? Make the gear yourself, trying to get the best possible score from the RNG. Unfortunately, the developers didn’t like how people would rather just deconstruct the gear they found for crafting materials to keep crafting until they got equipment with optimal random number generator stats, so they increased the required materials needed for crafting. Basically, they made grinding necessary, just for the sake of grinding. Not to mention, there are unforgivable technical issues. The most major issue was how it was possible to exploit the Incursion so that you could farm the rewards over and over with minimal effort, allowing dishonest players to max out their gear without much effort. On PC, the hacking and cheating is rampant, and Ubisoft is not treating the issue with enough urgency. ​Game balance issues are common for many large-scale multiplayer games, and players can look past those if they’re resolved in a timely manner, but there’s no reason for a game of this production value to have the number of game-breaking technical issues it does.

Really, the problems with The Division all boil down to “What is the point in grinding the end-game content?” Yes, the new armor sets are cool, but what am I going to use them for? Farming some more bullet sponge mob bosses? Get wrecked by cheaters? What if you really want to live up to the role play aspect of The Division, and not go rogue to kill other players, because going rogue is looked upon as a criminal action? Then you would only be able to fight other rogues. You could play for hours and not come across any other rogues to fight, or the only rogues you will come across are cheaters. Then, your PVP options as a player who only wants to play “Good” would be to grind just for the sake of grinding…

The developers designed themselves into a corner by using the realistic science fiction theme instead of going for imaginative science fiction. Save for the hundreds of bullets enemies can shake off, the game’s framework has to be somewhat believable in a Tom Clancy universe. This severely limits the developers’ capacity to design enemies and raids like those found in Destiny and Borderlands. Sure, using modern weapons and gear has the “second kind of cool” factor, but whether the tactical theme of the game outweighs the creative possibility of moving a few decades into the future is strongly contingent on how they can diversify the gameplay in future expansions.

The game has a solid foundation, and has potential depth for players to invest Call of Duty tier hours. But for the game in its current state, after the first free content update, is the game’s quality worth the price of entry? I don’t foresee a major price drop for the Division until at least after the first paid expansion is available, so you can expect to pay near full-price until mid-summer. Despite The Division’s game balance, end game content, and technical problems, the game still gets enough things right that I would recommend any action game fan consider playing it. The game’s graphical intensity is second to none in an open world game, and the atmosphere rivals the visceral morbidity of Metro, Amnesia, and Soma. There is gun and gear porn aplenty, which is exciting for me a competition shooter and firearms enthusiast. The game works well as a virtual hangout with your friends, and even grouping with randoms to run the daily missions or go Dark Zone-ing are satisfying and memorable experiences.Like Battlefield 4 has shown, player bases can forgive early launch problems if there are enough content updates to offset the agony from dealing with the unstable launch. Just like the first content drop, more obtainable legendary items released every now and then would give players incentive to stick with the game, and players could come back to the game if they’ve been away from a while if they fall in love at first sight with a recently made available legendary gear item.If you’re a casual gamer or weekend warrior, then the base game of The Division still has enough content to make buying the game at full price worth your time and money. Most of the complaints about content depth are from players who have poured 30 hours a week into the game since it was released and have already reached the level cap and maximum gear score. Ubisoft had underestimated some players’ dedication or how much people are willing to “no-life it” for new games, but that’s still no excuse for the limited amount of end-game challenges for high-level players. The true amount of content depth is somewhere in between the complaints from the “no-lifers” and Ubisoft’s vision for the game. If gaming is your lifeblood, and you need a game that you can pour World-of-Warcraft hours into, then The Division isn’t for you.

Still, this gaming season is not bone dry. Dark Souls 3 recently launched, and Uncharted 4, No Man’s Sky, Battleborn, Overwatch, Homefront: The Revolution, and Mirror’s Edge: Catalyst are soon launching, so if any of those games feels tempting, I wouldn’t disapprove putting off playing The Division until the game’s technical problems are resolved and more free content arrives. In summary, The Division provides a captivating setting with the most visually impressive cityscape in a multiplayer game. Obtaining new gear for your character is addicting and satisfying when you get amazing stats on your favorite gun. However, the current problems holding the game back are stat balance to allow for more diversity in character builds, technical problems related to game mechanics and player cheating, and creating ways to engage the high-level players that is more interesting than requiring more bullets to take down enemies.

Review Score: B-Positives:

Immersive and captivating setting and atmosphere

Best graphics of any open world game

In game gear based on real-world gear

Reliable and efficient party system

Negatives:

Stat balance issues, leading to convergent character builds

Technical problems with game mechanics and players cheating

Tedious system to get end-game gear

Repetitive content, especially for high level players

]]>Tue, 12 Apr 2016 00:17:06 GMThttp://www.verytraumatic.com/blog/glock-34-mos-9mm-trijicon-rmr-review-are-red-dot-sights-on-pistols-tactical-or-tacticoolWelcome to my review of the Glock 34 MOS 9mm pistol, and a discussion on whether it is worthwhile to add a red dot to your pistol for competition or defense. Bear in mind though, that the technical aspect of the review will not focus on Glock vs. Smith and Wesson or any other pistol platform, but more about the utility and design of the Glock MOS, modular optics system.

The review is organized into the following sections:

Brief developmental history of optics on pistols

Technical overview of the Glock 34 MOS

​Philosophy of use (POU- thanks nutnfancy)- What do you hope to accomplish by putting a red dot on your pistol? What are the performance advantages of a red dot on a pistol for competition and defensive use?

Accessory and upgrade considerations, with a quick discussion of relative value

Optics on Pistols- What's Been Done and What's to Come

Shooters have been doing custom milling to install red dots on their Glock slides for years, but 2015 was the first year that Glock had a factory-produced model with a slide cut to accept a red dot. Last year, US customers could only get the competition and hunting models with the MOS, but now the 17 and 19 have options for the MOS. Before that, Smith & Wesson had M&P models that were factory-cut for red dots, and FN made the FNX Tactical in 45 ACP with cuts for a slide-mounted red dot. From my research, as of the recording of this video, these are currently the only factory model centerfire handguns that can accept a red dot mounted deep within the slide. The Canik TP9 is getting a budget race gun makeover with its slide cut to accept a red dot, which should be available sometime in 2016. Reports of the Sig Sauer P320 RX, a P320 with a factory-installed Sig Romeo Red dot, have been floating around since early 2015, and Cabela’s even had a listing for them on their website for a while, but the release date kept getting pushed back. They might finally be launching in 2016. [APRIL 2016 Update- The Walther PPQ Q5 Match is now shipping to distributors.]

Glock Modular Optics System Technical Details

To see the how the MOS works and how to mount the Trijicon RMR, watch my earlier video about the Glock MOS. You’ll also see the sight picture of the Trijicon RMR and how it co-witnesses in different lightning conditions. The MOS can accept different optics like the Burris Fastfire or Leupold Deltapoint, but I decided on the Trijicon RMR (Amazon link) because it has models available with fiber optic and tritium dual-illumination, so you never have to worry about changing out batteries.

The MOS mounting system itself is not very robust. The MOS slides had to sacrifice some mounting security in order be adaptable to a variety of optic choices. You only have about 2 threads of engagement when securing the mounting plate to the slide and when securing the optic to the plate, so loctite is critical. The Glock screws are flimsy and easy to strip. If you want to use the Trijicon screws, you have to buy a spacer (Amazon link). I’m not a Glock engineer, but I do feel as though the MOS design was rushed to market. Then again, it may be possible that this was the only configuration that made it possible to accommodate different optics. CZ Custom did manage to mill a P-09 slide to accept different optics without the need for mounting plates. My RMR has still kept its zero and remained rock-solid, but I wouldn’t use the red dot as a slide racking aid unless I absolutely had to, What I don’t have a problem with is the mounting depth. Some shooters would prefer the RMR to sit lower within the slide, but I feel the MOS height is the perfect balance in providing co-witness when needed and preventing the suppressor-height sights from being too obstructive when not needed.

Save for the optics cut, the Glock 34 MOS is virtually identical to the Glock 34 Gen 4. The barrel is 5.31 inches long. The slide has one large port, to keep the upper assembly mass closer to the Glock 17’s, as to not require as much fiddling with recoil springs for timing. The factory 17 pound recoil springs are interchangeable between the Gen 4 Glock 17 and Glock 34. The recoil spring assembly has a captive polymer guide rod wrapped with dual-springs, a feature of Gen 3 subcompact and all Gen 4 Glocks. The gun comes with adjustable polymer sights, which will not co-witness with any optic, so I swapped mine out for the Ameriglo suppressor height sights (Amazon link). The fire-control group has the Glock minus connector already installed, so the trigger should break closer to 4.5-5 lbs instead of the standard 5.5-6 lbs.

The “brass-to-face” problems of the Gen 4 Glocks are also present on the Glock MOS, but I feel it’s more problematic due to the reduced slide velocity from the added mass of the RMR. If you remember from my shooting clips, you can see the brass roll off of my forearms. That was with Freedom Munitions 135 grain factory new loads, which tends to be slightly underpowered. Winchester white box also has similar ejection patterns. These are all American-spec economy-grade ammo. European economy grade 9mm, like from PPU, Magtech, S&B, and Perfecta, run hotter loads, and eject casings with more force than American-made economy grade 9mm. I did get some brass-to-face within the first 400 rounds when shooting Perfecta from Wal-Mart, but after more breaking in, the ejection improves to where you don’t have to worry about any more brass to face.

Overall, I’ve not had problems with reliable cycling. I did have one malfunction, but that was on my first range trip, with Freedom Munitions’ underpowered ammo, using a Glock factory magazine pinned to hold only 10 rounds. The pin stops the spring’s regular decompression, so I was lucky the gun even cycled at all. I’ve since gotten some aftermarket magazines from a Virginia gun show. The Magpul ones are good to go, but the ETS ones are not.

Philosophy of Use (POU)

The Glock 34 is not going to be my primary competition pistol, because I shoot in the tac-optics division, and you would have to move to the open division if you wanted to use a pistol with an optic. The reason I still wanted a centerfire pistol that was factory-milled to accept a red dot optic was to add a new dynamic to my training. With a parallax-free red dot optic, the sight alignment fundamental of shooting proficiency becomes a non-factor. It’s easier to shoot with both eyes open, but both eyes open shooting is a skill everyone should develop early and often, as you’ll have better situational awareness and less muscle strain. You are all-but guaranteed to quickly acquire a clear sight picture when looking through a red dot, versus when aligning iron sights (or polymer sights, if you’re using the Glock factory sights), when you have to pound it into your brain to bring the front sight in focus, which blurs out the target. I found that getting proper sight alignment was one of the reasons that I hesitated before taking my first shot after drawing. I’m cross dominant, mean that even though I’m right handed, my left eye is my dominant eye, resolving the straight-on focal point, and the right eye gives an angled view for depth perception. Instead of squeezing my left eye closed, I tilt my head to align my left eye with the sights so that I can shoot with both eyes open. The parallax-free red dot sight make sight alignment a non-factor to my speed and accuracy, so I can concentrate on other fundamentals, like trigger squeeze and muscle coordination. With more practice on those fundamentals, it allows me to go back to a gun with iron sights only, with the confidence in knowing that I have the muscle memory for correct trigger squeeze and muscle coordination, so now I don’t have to devote any of my active thinking to anything except sight picture and getting rounds on targets quickly.

I’ll try not to sound like I’m exaggerating or overstating the benefits (I’ll probably fail though), but simply put, a red dot on a pistol is a game changer. Whether you are a sponsored competitor who makes a living from shooting sports, or you’re just a novice starting out, shooting with a red dot instead of iron sights improves your speed and precision. I’ve had so many people try out my Glock MOS and say “I’m normally horrible with a Glock, but there’s no way you can’t not shoot well when you have a red dot that does all the work for you.” There’s no learning curve to using a pistol with an optic- just like with a rifle, you put the dot where you want rounds to hit and let them fly. The smaller dot, 7.0 MOA in my RMR, allows you to get tighter group sizes on paper and hit precision targets that the thick front sight post would have covered up entirely.

Although a red dot can enhance existing skills, it cannot offset or replace the importance of pistol training fundamentals. Red dot or not, if you want to be shoot quickly and accurately, the same pistol handling mechanics are important. When drawing, you can’t just extend the pistol and look for the dot (i.e., "chasing the dot") because the window is way too small. You would have been faster to get on target just using the iron sights. When drawing, you still have to index your dominant eye on your front sight when presenting the gun toward your target, but once your optic comes reasonably aligned with your front sight, the dot will come into view, and you can now shift your focus to the target. As a cross-dominant shooter, even though I can align the optic over my right eye, I still choose to aim with my left eye because it’s how I index on the front sight, and it’s much faster to reacquire the dot after the slide cycles.

Although everyone will benefit from shooting through an optic instead of iron sights, the degree of improvement will vary based on the shooter’s experience. A high-volume shooter with years of pistol training will only see sight improvement, because sight alignment is second nature to them. Hickok45 is a cross-dominant shooter, and he shoots better with irons than most shooters can shoot with a red dot. A novice shooter using a red dot pistol can easily halve their time and double their accuracy. The type of targets also make a difference on how much your performance will improve. For torso-sized targets at common defensive ranges, you’re not going to notice any difference. For poppers or smaller plates at 25 yards, you’ll definitely appreciate having a red dot sight. It’s important to have realistic expectations based on your shooting experience and the type of shooting you will do at the range.

The suppressor-height sights sit low enough that you can have a clear view of the RMR's dot...

...but are just tall enough to co-witness with the RMR's dot when needed.

You can also close your performance gap using a pistol with irons-only by upgrading to a set of quality competition sights. Most factory pistols come with 3 dot or non-contrast sights, which make it harder to index your vision on just the front sight when it’s easy for the rear sight to pull your eye’s focus away. Going with a blacked-out rear and a large, bright front sight is a massive improvement. Here’s me shooting my CZ with an upgraded trigger and competition sights. I didn’t measure with a shot timer, but the performance comparison seems similar enough to what I can manage with the Glock’s stock trigger and RMR. Try upgrading to competition sights before deciding on a red dot pistol. You might improve enough that you feel like you won’t need a red dot to reach your performance goals.

The Glock with the RMR has met all my expectations for performance at the range, but for real world defensive and carry use, how much benefit would a pistol with a red dot have over a pistol with only iron sights

Keep in mind, that I have no military or law enforcement background, and all of my thoughts about defensive use come from literature review. In real world defensive shooting situations with pistols, very little shooting is actually precision aimed shooting. Microseconds count in a deadly force situation. You simply don’t have the time to get sight alignment like you’re in a bullseye match. The maximum range at which most pistol defensive shootings occur is seven yards. Even without seeing the sights, point-shooting, which is literally just pointing the gun in the assailant’s direction and squeezing the trigger, is good enough to reliably hit center mass enough times through half a magazine to stop the assailant. Proficiency on the range doesn’t translate into effectiveness in a deadly force situation. In data from the NYPD SOP 9 report, which is one of the most comprehensive sources on police shooting statistics, officers who were in the higher percentiles on range scoring had no statistically significant advantage in hit percentage in defensive shootings compared to officers who were at the lower end of the range score spectrum. The hit percentage against assailants without a firearm is about 30%, and in gunfights, the hit percentage can drop down to as low as 11%. And yes, most of the data comes from before the NYPD adopted the heavy Glock triggers. That’s not to say that you can’t train to improve your performance under stress- it’s just that training for bullseye precision isn’t representative of the instinctive shooting skills you need to develop, and a red dot won’t help you get there. Nothing can replace proficiency in defensive shooting fundamentals.

Therefore, the ability to have a red dot on your pistol should not be a major factor in deciding on a pistol for defensive use. However, I can’t think of ways having a red dot could negatively impact a pistol’s defensive performance. I’ve searched for data on whether any United States police departments have approved red dots on duty pistols, and please correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve not found any that have given department-wide blanket authorization for red dots on duty pistols. There have only been individual forum posts from “officers” who have outfitted their duty pistol with an optic. But again, you have to take these posts not just with a grain of salt, but pick up the entire salt shaker and go to town because who knows how many of these “officers” are actually LEO and how many are like the stolen valor people, living vicariously through the sacrifices of others. That’s a mental health issue that would take way too long to finish discussing in a gun review video...Moving on, I’ve only seen one source on the Glock MOS used in military service, aka “seen in the wild,” and that’s from Greek forces. Even so, I feel that putting a red dot on a pistol is gameplanning for .01% of tactical scenarios where a red dot would actually matter on a pistol. Again, I can’t see it being a detriment, but for duty or service use, if you’re in a situation where you have the time to aim down sights, and you need the precision of a red dot, then the situation would be better resolved with a shotgun or rifle,

So why in particular would you want to choose the Glock 34 over the Glock 17 or Glock 19 MOS? With an optic, the increased sight radius of the full-frame models is worthless. For defensive considerations, you might get 15 FPS more bullet velocity going from the 4 inch barrel of the Glock 19 to the 5.31 inch barrel of the Glock 34. So is there any reason to choose the full-frame Glocks, when the Glock 19 is arguably a better fit for most shooters’ hands, easier to carry, and easier to point-fire? I still chose the Glock 34 because for me, carry comfort is a non-factor, so I chose the Glock 34 for the slight edge in shooting comfort and controllability over the Glock 17. The difference in recoil is going to be subtle, probably not enough for most to justify the added size of the 34 over the 17, but I favor anything that minimizes shooting fatigue over high round count range sessions. Talk to any benchrest shooter about the effects of accumulated recoil. Most of the F-Class benchrest community has a money-no-object approach to their equipment, but there’s a reason why you don’t see much 338 Lapua or other magnum action calibers in F-Class matches, and why short action calibers continue to set records. It doesn’t matter if you’re Marcus Luttrell or Bob Lee Swagger, cumulative felt recoil affects your mechanics, and you can get sloppy until you sleep it off. The same concept applies to pistols. Minimizing felt recoil over the course of a long, high round count shooting session keeps your skills sharper, and you won’t have as many misses in the later stages.

So is there any point to choosing the Glock 19 with an RMR? Without MOS considerations, many choose to get the Glock 19 because of its ease of carry and/or concealment over the Glock 17, and the grip is a better fit for most, but having a red dot increases the pistol’s profile and could print through some clothes, minimizing the advantages of the compact form factor, so you have conflicting design choices that minimize the strengths of each. You reduce compactness, and you don't have controllability of the full-frame Glocks to take optimize for the speed advantage of shooting with an optic. For an all-in-one gun- home defense, carry, and target shooting- the Glock 19 is still a viable option. As mentioned earlier, you are not hindered by the shorter sight radius of the compact Glock because you now have an optic. The difference in recoil intensity going from the Glock 17 to the Glock 19 is much more noticeable than the recoil difference in going from the Glock 34 to the Glock 17, but the snappier Glock 19 is still very controllable for typical defensive ranges, but will require more time to get back on target for competition style courses of fire.

Accessories, Upgrades, and Value

There are no shortage of options for Glock modifications, but how many of them are actually upgrades? Some Glock owners just want an improved trigger, and some Glock owners want the whole race gun treatment. So I feel like I’m going to rustle a lot of jimmies with my suggestions on Glock modifications. Many Glock accessories on the market drastically reduce the reliability and their parts do not pass the long-term durability test of Glock factory original parts. And here’s where the comments start flowing with “I’ve got this upgrade kit and it’s worked flawlessly through x number of rounds.” Good for you. The reality that many Glock tuners don’t want to face is that Glocks are harder to tune than hammer-fired pistols. With the few number of action components, each part has a greater relative importance. The design specifications have a much tighter tolerance to allow each part to do double duty while ensuring proper clearances and correct timing. Domestic startup firearm manufacturing companies simply don’t have the overhead to perform the industrial-level reliability testing that Glock does, and if you think they do, then you’re deluded. Firearm accessory manufacturing has a slim overhead, with smaller companies flirting with being in the red year round.

It’s not to say that Glocks cannot be reliable race guns. It just takes a ridiculous amount of dedication that the average enthusiast cannot devote. The race guns are often tuned to a custom handload, and will choke on any other ammo. Even then, in matches I’ve gone to, I’ve seen Glock race guns choke the most, even for a shooter with more experience than me shooting their custom handloads. If you want your Glock to have the same reliability that Glock built their reputation around, then I cannot in good conscience recommend you pursue modifying your Glock’s action. You don’t have to listen to me. I’m a literal nobody in the world of firearms. But I’m just saying that the Glock accessory market is the perfect embodiment of just because of you can, doesn’t mean you should. Again, this is a touchy subject, so I’ll just let it go for now.

To mount your red dot, you can also use a rear-sight dovetail or rail mount. Are these reliable or effective? Maybe. Sorry I don’t have a more in-depth opinion. You do definitely lose the, here’s another fancy nuts term, “second kind of cool” from using the MOS system.

You can choose to get your slide custom-milled for a red dot, but please go to a reputable gunsmith. I’ve seen a lot of botched milling jobs, with poor alignment or cuts so deep that it exposed the striker spring. If you don’t already own a Glock and want one that accept a slide-mounted red dot, then there’s almost no reason not to get the MOS model. It comes in at a lower price than getting the custom milling work, and you don’t have to destroy the resale value of the Glock that you send for custom milling.

The tac-light I’ve been shooting with is the Inforce APL (Amazon link). I choose this one over competing models because of its affordability and because it only uses 1 CR123A battery, helping to cut down on weight. The Glock 34 is the only pistol I can tolerate shooting with a tac-light. The loaded pistol without the tac-light already has a well-balanced feel, with the large port on the slide minimizing a front-heavy weight distribution, so the tac-light actually works as a counterweight in reducing muzzle jump. With some more top-heavy guns, like the CZ P-09, shooting with a tac-light actually feels like you’re just adding more inertia to the gun when it recoils, increaing both the muzzle jump and the the muzzle drop when the slide returns to battery. With a tac-light equipped glock, I do feel as though it’s a little slower to get on target because of the increase overall weight of the pistol, but getting successive shots on each target is much easier due to the reduce muzzle jump.

The custom kydex holster I ordered for the Glock 34 MOS with the Inforce APL is the Duty KT Azalea with a sick Kryptek Mandrake camo pattern. I opted for a thumb break for active retention and Blade Tech’s Tek-Lok for the belt attachment mechanism. KT holsters are already fitted for suppressor height sights. There are some holster designers, like Safariland, that offer Glock MOS holsters that cover the optic entirely, reducing the chance that the optic will snag and knock the slide out of battery. ​

Summary

In summary, the Glock MOS platform gives the shooter many options for mounting their optic of choice. Shooting with a red dot can be a game changer, depending on shooter experience and the type of target. For defensive applications, the option to add a red dot should not be a deciding factor in weapon choice. Glocks have a much-deserved reputation for reliability. Please don’t buy a Glock with the primary intention of modifying the trigger or action. That’s not to say you should rule out ever modding your Glock, but if the only way you can enjoy shooting a Glock is if it has mods, then the gun isn’t for you.